Patna High CourtCR. MISC./1417/2026dismissed

Munni Devi v. The State Of Bihar

2026-01-28Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Sinha2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.1417 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-72 Year-2025 Thana- BHANGHA District- West Champaran ====================================================== Munni Devi W/o Late Nagendra Bhandari Resident of Village- Rampur, P.S.- Bhangaha, Dist.- West Champaran ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The State of Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Abhinav Anand, Adv For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr.Tarun Prasad Mandal, APP ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA ORAL ORDER 28-01-2026 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner apprehends her arrest in connection with Bhangha P.S. Case No. 72 of 2025, registered for the offence punishable under Sections 109, 303(2), 351(2), (3) of the B.N.S.

3. The case of the prosecution as per the informant, namely, Sushila Devi is that on 11.07.2025 at around 04:00 P.M., when she was going at her home and Most. Munni Devi attacked her from behind with axe and due to which, her head got cut and blood started coming out. She fell on the ground and get unconscious. When her daughter came to save her then Dipu Kumari, Gopi Subba, Ramanand Choudhary with pre intention started assaulting her daughter Suman Kumari.

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.1417 of 2026(2) dt.28-01-2026 2/2 Thereafter, Munni Kumari and Dipu Kumari snatched gold chain and threatened to kill her daughter.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the present case. The petitioner and the informant are agnates and there is a land dispute between the parties. The allegation levelled against the petitioner is general and omnibus. He further submits that the petitioner has no criminal antecedent.

5. Learned A.P.P. for the State opposes the prayer of anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the fact that there is direct allegation against the petitioner of having attacked with 'axe' on the head of the informant, which is a vital part of the body, caused injury on her head which could have resulted in the death of informant-Sushila Devi, this Court is not inclined to grant privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7.

Accordingly, the present anticipatory bail application stands rejected.

(Alok Kumar Sinha, J) kiran/- U T